tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jul 09 14:06:19 2000

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

pouring (was RE: Deixis and direction)



ja' charghwI':
>My listing just says that {qang} means "pour" while {lIch}, which
>ghunchu'wI' mentions below, means "pour (into/onto anything)". I had never
>thought about it before, but just looking at these glosses, I'd expect to
>say, "I pour the water into the glass," as:
>
>bIQ vIqangmeH HIvje' vIlIch.}

You've constructed this as if {lIch} meant "pour into/onto (something)",
with the locative words included in the core meaning of the verb.  I don't
believe that's what the parenthetical words are intended to imply.

>It sounds an awful lot like the difference between {ja'} and {jatlh}. The
>verbs are basically identical except for the nouns one would use for the
>direct object.

The way I read it, the difference between {qang} and {lIch} is that {qang}
*must* have a container involved as both source and target, and {lIch} has
no such restriction.  The word "onto" in the definition of {lIch} tells me
that {voDleH nachDaq 'awje' vIlIch} is a legal and appropriate sentence
(the activity itself might be neither, of course).  The object of both
verbs looks like it's the same thing:  the substance being poured.




Back to archive top level